Prose from a Poshboy

[SuuPRlim]

@0800 - glad Dave has answered your questions. Basically like pleno said, winning £20k doesn't mean I'm going to punt £5k of it on 4 bullets on 2 tournaments where the outcome is going to be 4 bricks about 50% of the time. I would likely go bankrupt very quickly if I didn't sell percentages for tournaments that were for x% of my bankroll.
 

So, how much would you need to have before you would consider keeping the lot?  The only successful gamblers I know personally all have one thing in common; press up the stakes when you're in form and reduce them when you're not... mind you, that's horses and sports, but I would imagine it applies across the board as form is form.

I guess it's more on the person and their personality, some people are much tighter/preservant over their money, others are looser and slightly more gambley, it's just whatever the person is comfortable with, it's all the same really, the prior gives himself a lot lower chance of going broke, and the latter gives himself a better chance of making a lot of money quicker.

Either way you make the decisions cos they best suit you.

[cambridgealex]

@Newy and 0800, The decision to sell in this case is entirely for BRM purposes. I have done things in the past for the community sweat, like the live stream cash game sweat, which was no markup, just a bit of fun for blonde because people would be watching and I thought they'd enjoy having a small financial interest as well.

I know what you mean, selling 25% for a £1k isn't going to make much difference to me - but actually, in the long run - as a bankroll strategy it is. It's two bullets, so it's twice as much, and I don't see it as a one off event. I am trying to make my living playing poker, and a decent chunk of that is through live tournaments. It's bad practice for me to "take shots" everytime a big event is on and not sell any. I'm not rolled to play £1ks unbacked, I would certainly need a 6figure roll if I was playing them everyday, more like 200-300k. Because they don't happen everyday, and it's more like once a month, I "punt" a little harder and don't sell as much as I should actually.

(In theory, I believe for a live tournament like this, if it were to happen everyday, you'd need ~200buyins to take the variance, so in theory if I had £100k I'd still need to sell 50% everytime. That is why I still consider it a shot to only be selling 25%)

This whole "pressing when you're in form" is the ultimate gamblers fallacy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy) implying that the behaviour of the cards (or wheel) in the past has some influence on the future. There is something to be said for confidence and feeling good, which can come about by recent success (I often say in my OPs if I've had a good run recently so feeling in the zone etc), but it's basically BS when people say "I'm in good form, gonna "press" - it's like saying "Tens have been coming on the flop a lot here so I'm playing T4" or "the ball has landed on red 5 times in a row, I'm going red". Of course the most successful gamblers you know have this strategy, selection bias etc http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selection_bias

I'm selling less than I would've done 2 weeks ago, but that is not because of my "form" that is because of fluctuation in my bankroll.

@Newy who asked about satellites - I have actually already won a seat to the MC, but since I would defo be taking a 2nd bullet, I thought I should sell even so.

[cambridgealex]

Ironically in that gambler's fallacy page the first sentance reads "The Gambler's fallacy, also known as the Monte Carlo fallacy (because its most famous example happened in a Monte Carlo Casino in 1913)"

[NEWY]

Ty for reply, if maximising your income as a professional was ur main objective then of course u have every right to ask for whatever price u like, Supply and demand. As this is a social forum and not a shrewd business forum I think it understandable that people didnt want to pay the pros income and chose to wait for price reduction or bought camels @1.2. people jus want a fun sweat with hopefully bonus money coming back at the end. Gud luck I sure you will be ok and back to back to back final tables is very achievable for someone with your skillz. Peace 

[aaron1867]

1.5 was ridic, field is still going to be tough and not really sure anyone should be over .3 IMO.

Yeah you cashed the last two, but how long was that ago & the sats in place? I think it's about 35% of field will sats, still will be one of best fields in recent times.

Lots of silly marks up though lately

Not rising to it, but will just point out how ridiculous the points that "it was a long time ago" and about satellites. I don't know how either of those can make this a TOUGHER tournament than in 2011?

Unless you think in 2 years I have improved at a slower rate than the "field" has?

And having MORE satellites than in 2011 makes it tougher?

About the field, I bet most if not all of the horses Keith and Keys put into the MC are in the top 30 out of the 500 runners they are hoping for.

I am not saying you haven't improved, but it doesn't mean it's going to be softer than 2011. There was still probably a satellite program in place when it last happened.

Your MU's are pretty decent on here, but was such poor form to somehow get to a MU of 1.5

[lee h]

Question:

A typical £1000+70 tournament. with say 500 entries

Some players positive  ROI some neutral ROI some negative  ROI.

Show what you think is the distribution of the population in say 10% ranges.

 5 players 200% roi
 10 players 190% roi
200 players 100 roi

should add back to total investments.

Very curious to see what people think the distribution looks like.

[tikay]

1.5 was ridic, field is still going to be tough and not really sure anyone should be over .3 IMO.

Yeah you cashed the last two, but how long was that ago & the sats in place? I think it's about 35% of field will sats, still will be one of best fields in recent times.

Lots of silly marks up though lately

Not rising to it, but will just point out how ridiculous the points that "it was a long time ago" and about satellites. I don't know how either of those can make this a TOUGHER tournament than in 2011?

Unless you think in 2 years I have improved at a slower rate than the "field" has?

And having MORE satellites than in 2011 makes it tougher?

About the field, I bet most if not all of the horses Keith and Keys put into the MC are in the top 30 out of the 500 runners they are hoping for.

I am not saying you haven't improved, but it doesn't mean it's going to be softer than 2011. There was still probably a satellite program in place when it last happened.

You MU everything pretty decent on here, but was such poor form to somehow get to a MU of 1.5

Steady on Aaron, "poor form" is the wrong choice of words.

He is a Pro, poker is his living. So he has to maximise his wages, same as you & me.

He is a Community Member, one of the best here, so he needs to do Community things, if he wants continued respect.

So he has to choose, or strike a balance. And I know for a fact he agonised over it, & eventually decided that he probably got the balance between those two things slightly wrong.

I really don't want to get involved in all this stuff, but have you never got a delicate, awkward, very finely-balanced decision slightly wrong? Everyone has at some time. Alex is a quick learner though.

He may have misjudged the Market slighty, or get that balance thing wrong.  That is a long road from poor form.

The debate has been terrific, very enlightening & educational for many of us, you included I would think.

[aaron1867]

1.5 was ridic, field is still going to be tough and not really sure anyone should be over .3 IMO.

Yeah you cashed the last two, but how long was that ago & the sats in place? I think it's about 35% of field will sats, still will be one of best fields in recent times.

Lots of silly marks up though lately

Not rising to it, but will just point out how ridiculous the points that "it was a long time ago" and about satellites. I don't know how either of those can make this a TOUGHER tournament than in 2011?

Unless you think in 2 years I have improved at a slower rate than the "field" has?

And having MORE satellites than in 2011 makes it tougher?

About the field, I bet most if not all of the horses Keith and Keys put into the MC are in the top 30 out of the 500 runners they are hoping for.

I am not saying you haven't improved, but it doesn't mean it's going to be softer than 2011. There was still probably a satellite program in place when it last happened.

You MU everything pretty decent on here, but was such poor form to somehow get to a MU of 1.5

Steady on Aaron, "poor form" is the wrong choice of words.

He is a Pro, poker is his living. So he has to maximise his wages, same as you & me.

He is a Community Member, one of the best here, so he needs to do Community things, if he wants continued respect.

So he has to choose, or strike a balance. And I know for a fact he agonised over it, & eventually decided that he probably got the balance between those two things slightly wrong.

I really don't want to get involved in all this stuff, but have you never got a delicate, awkward, very finely-balanced decision slightly wrong? Everyone has at some time. Alex is a quick learner though.

He may have misjudged the Market slighty, or get that balance thing wrong.  That is a long road from poor form.

The debate has bee terrific, very enlightening & educational for many of us, you included I would think.

Yeah I am being very harsh, but it's not like Alex to come up with a MU like that really, which it was very surprising.

[pleno1]

1.5 was ridic, field is still going to be tough and not really sure anyone should be over .3 IMO.

Yeah you cashed the last two, but how long was that ago & the sats in place? I think it's about 35% of field will sats, still will be one of best fields in recent times.

Lots of silly marks up though lately

Not rising to it, but will just point out how ridiculous the points that "it was a long time ago" and about satellites. I don't know how either of those can make this a TOUGHER tournament than in 2011?

Unless you think in 2 years I have improved at a slower rate than the "field" has?

And having MORE satellites than in 2011 makes it tougher?

About the field, I bet most if not all of the horses Keith and Keys put into the MC are in the top 30 out of the 500 runners they are hoping for.

I am not saying you haven't improved, but it doesn't mean it's going to be softer than 2011. There was still probably a satellite program in place when it last happened.

You MU everything pretty decent on here, but was such poor form to somehow get to a MU of 1.5

Steady on Aaron, "poor form" is the wrong choice of words.

He is a Pro, poker is his living. So he has to maximise his wages, same as you & me.

He is a Community Member, one of the best here, so he needs to do Community things, if he wants continued respect.

So he has to choose, or strike a balance. And I know for a fact he agonised over it, & eventually decided that he probably got the balance between those two things slightly wrong.

I really don't want to get involved in all this stuff, but have you never got a delicate, awkward, very finely-balanced decision slightly wrong? Everyone has at some time. Alex is a quick learner though.

He may have misjudged the Market slighty, or get that balance thing wrong.  That is a long road from poor form.

The debate has bee terrific, very enlightening & educational for many of us, you included I would think.

Yeah I am being very harsh, but it's not like Alex to come up with a MU like that really, which it was very surprising.

he has sold previouly at similar mu's and sold out v quickly.

[Dubai]

Its not really his fault, he put a massively high markup for a French tourny which was admittedly soft but sold a lot quicker than it perhaps should have, so therefore he just went from there. No big deal all round really, he handled it really well imo

[pleno1]

+!

[jakally]

+"

[rfgqqabc]

Question:

A typical £1000+70 tournament. with say 500 entries

Some players positive  ROI some neutral ROI some negative  ROI.

Show what you think is the distribution of the population in say 10% ranges.

 5 players 200% roi
 10 players 190% roi
200 players 100 roi

should add back to total investments.

Very curious to see what people think the distribution looks like.

Probably a touch flatter but definitely this. It should also be slightly skewed left due to the rake like the one below.



ignore the stuff on the axis, I just googled the right sort of graphs.

[NEWY]

Question:

A typical £1000+70 tournament. with say 500 entries

Some players positive  ROI some neutral ROI some negative  ROI.

Show what you think is the distribution of the population in say 10% ranges.

 5 players 200% roi
 10 players 190% roi
200 players 100 roi

should add back to total investments.

Very curious to see what people think the distribution looks like.

This clearly explains everything for me. 

[redarmi]

This whole "pressing when you're in form" is the ultimate gamblers fallacy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy) implying that the behaviour of the cards (or wheel) in the past has some influence on the future. There is something to be said for confidence and feeling good, which can come about by recent success (I often say in my OPs if I've had a good run recently so feeling in the zone etc), but it's basically BS when people say "I'm in good form, gonna "press" - it's like saying "Tens have been coming on the flop a lot here so I'm playing T4" or "the ball has landed on red 5 times in a row, I'm going red". Of course the most successful gamblers you know have this strategy, selection bias etc http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selection_bias

I don't think that you read my post;  I said horses and sports, not house games...

It doesn't matter what it is it is still gamblers fallacy.   Of course in the long run as bankroll increases then so can stakes but if the percentage of bankroll at risk is being increased on the basis of recent form then it is a huge mistake to be making.